Cyber Adultery in the 21st Century
Exclusive by Raïssa Robles
CAUTION NSFW: Sexually explicit discussion in this post. Reader’s discretion and/or parental guidance are advised.
A new commenter named “RM” wrote several posts today saying “there is no such crime as cyber adultery.”
The commenter argued:
can there be adultery without sexual intercourse? no. how about through skype? is that possible? again we refer to the definition of sexual intercourse as defined under our jurisprudence and not on any source found in the internet. it must be one where the male’s penis must have contact with the female’s vagina. so can we do it through skype? of course not. so what now? can we still commit adultery through the use of information and communications technology? of course not.
As an example of how cyber adultery could take place, RM — who is clearly not going to become famous for delicacy of speech (or perhaps he plans to start a career writing porn novels because he’s not doing too well as a lawyer, assuming he is one) wrote:
say A and B are married. B the wife went to the house of her neighbor C, a man. both engaged in sexual intercourse in the past without the knowledge of A the legal husband. now say for instance C, the man took out his iphone 5 and inserted it in the vagina of B then had the vibration turned on and the latter was shaking and screaming at the top of her lungs saying deeper! deeper! A the husband heard it and recognized her wife’s voice. so he went to the apartment of C to see for himself what was happening and boom. they were caught in the act of doing the deed. so A decided to file a criminal action. Question: what crime may B and C be held liable for, if any? the answer is of course is adultery. not cyber adultery but adultery. the fact that C inserted his iphone inside the vagina of B does not make the cybercrime law applicable because carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.
In one of my replies to RM, I said:
You are looking at the law from the prism of today and yesterday.
I am looking at the law from what could happen in the future when the definition of “adultery” or “sexual intercourse” could change.
Recall that the definition of rape changed dramatically in our law. Penetration is no longer required to establish rape.
I also said:
You are going by the current legal definition of the word “sexual intercourse”. What if this definition changes due to technology?
I was going to drop this matter and move on to another topic until I read RM’s next comment where he, in effect, said I should first study more to be worthy of arguing with him because I am not a lawyer with four years of law studies. RM said:
the things i am talking about is not subject to a debate unless you are a lawyer, a law student, or a person who has devoted his whole life studying our judicial system in the Philippines. these things are very technical which cannot just be understood by reading blogs and news and opinion of others. you have to read our revised penal code. you have to read our family code. you have to read our constitution. you have to read the rules on civil procedure as well as criminal procedure and also the rules on evidence particularly the admissibility of evidence there are a bunch of requisites in order for an evidence to be admissible. you have to know what an object evidence is. what a documentary and testimonial evidence refer to. the best evidence rule the parol evidence rule the spousal immunity or the marital disqualification rule and distinguish it from marital privileged communication and from parental and filial privilege which you also have to connect in the provision under the Family Code particularly art. 215 regarding when the testimony of the witness is considered indispensable in a crime as an exception to the general rule and what crimes covered and committed by whom. this is why the study of law takes four years. it is not like we see a law we read it and then we understand it already no. we should not assume too much that we know about it especially if that is not our field of specialization.
RM is right. I have not devoted four years of study in law. I am only a perpetual law student and an informal one at that.
RM is also resorting to what American biologist-blogger PZ Myers called the “Courtier’s Reply”. You can read about it by clicking on this link.
However, while some people condescendingly tell others not to dabble in law when they are not lawyers, perhaps some alleged lawyers should not claim to know about technology when in reality they know nothing about it. And they think pomposity and pedantry are a substitute for wisdom.
Now let me get back to the issue on hand.
RM illustrated adultery in this manner:
- C, the man took out his iphone 5 and inserted it in the vagina of B then had the vibration turned on and the latter was shaking and screaming at the top of her lungs saying deeper! deeper!
- A the husband heard it and recognized her (sic) wife’s voice.
- so he went to the apartment of C to see for himself what was happening and boom. they were caught in the act of doing the deed.
Then RM gave a mini-lecture on the definition of “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse”:
In this example, the penetration was accomplished with the use of an iPhone, because as “RM” explained “carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act (of) a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.”
Before I go into cyber adultery, I must say I am intrigued by RM’s idea of what constitutes sexual intercourse.
RM, if the married woman tells the court she was only having oral sex in bed with her lover, does that let her off the hook because that’s not adultery as you define it? Or if the man only wanted an unmentionable object (let’s euphemistically refer to it as an “RM”) inserted inside his anus by his married woman-lover, that isn’t adultery, too?
But I want to thank you, RM. This definition of sexual intercourse you gave as – “the act of a person inserting…any other object in the vagina of a woman” – makes cyber adultery possible.
There is a technological device about to be sold in Taiwan this month that could make cyber adultery through “long distance sex” possible – or sex via bluetooth.
Remember what RM said:
carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse is also defined by jurisprudence as the act of a person inserting his penis or any other object in the vagina of a woman.
For starters, what if this bluetooth device that I’m speaking of – which the distant lover guides via the Internet – is used by a married woman?
What if the spouse catches the married woman in the act, while online with her lover?
Of course this scenario is not in the Revised Penal Code which was drawn up half a century before the Internet and social media platforms were invented. However, if Section 6 – which crammed the entire Revised Penal Code containing the crime of adultery – is allowed to remain in the Cybercrime Prevention Act, this could be used in the future against cyber lovers.
As I said, I would have no problem with adultery being in the Cybercrime Law provided it punishes both married men and women equally and not just women. Because the Internet will provide men with more ways to cheat on their wives without legal sanctions.
As my husband Alan – who pointed out the existence of this Internet-enabled device – reminded me. Today, this is what’s available. You never know what technology will come up with tomorrow.
Call me maybe: Taiwanese smartphone gizmo Love Palz gives couples good gyrations
Devices send data related to movement between a smartphone via a bluetooth connection
Dads spending lonely nights away from home or guys having a hard time meeting their mistresses might enjoy a new cyber-sex aid from Taiwan, reports Shukan Post (Oct. 26).
Love Palz is a machine and app that enables couples separated by long distances to enjoy virtual sex with one another while mutually connected to an iPhone or other smartphone device.
The product, scheduled to be released in January, is comprised of a male and female version, each consisting of a simple design, resembling a sleek thermos bottle. When the cap is removed from the female version (called “Hera”) a smooth phallus is revealed. For “Zeus,” the inside is a cylindrical cavity lined with textured silicone.
The devices send data back and forth between the user’s smartphone via a Bluetooth connection. A speed sensor in Zeus detects the velocity of the male’s piston-like action and sends that data to Hera, which in turn recreates that motion simultaneously. Hera, for her part, senses pressure changes based on the female’s reaction and sends that information to Zeus, whose built-in air pump adjusts tightness appropriately.
The smartphone app allows both users to see the face of their partner during the sessions, which the Web site envisions taking place in the home, office, or great outdoors.
The developer of the device was studying in the United Kingdom when he came up with the idea. “I was lonely during my studies as I couldn’t see my girlfriend back in Taiwan,” says the representative from the company. “That was my inspiration. I want couples engaged in long-distance relationships to enjoy this product’s benefits.”
Each unit is made of a high-quality, aluminum-magnesium alloy, which, according to LovePalz, is “non-toxic, light, durable, and last but not the least, very fashionable.” The company also claims that the device is fully water proof and usable in water.
Of concern to Shukan Post is the quality of the interior silicone. “The male version provides an almost equivalent experience in pleasure to that provided by a Tenga product,” assures the LovePalz representative, referring to Japan’s popular manufacturer of male masturbation aids.
The LovePalz Web site says that while its product was rejected on the Kickstarter fundraising platform more than 3,800 pre-orders have been made. The device is priced at $94.50 for a pair. The company also sells a special 24-carat edition (limited to 10 sets) for $10,000.
This is not the first pleasuring device for use in cyberspace. The Somcon solo-wanker that includes detachable parts suitable for both sexes has been on the market for a few years.
LovePalz admits that Japan is a key market given its advanced sex toys. “We have about 1,000 orders from Japan already,” says the company’s representative.
Soon to be heard in the streets of Shibuya: “Hey, I just met you, and this is crazy, but here’s my number, so…”(A.T.)
Source: “iPhone de konna kota made!? Taiwan kigyo ga kaihatsu, ” Shukan Post (Oct. 26, pages 145-146)
Note: Brief extracts from Japanese vernacular media in the public domain that appear here were translated and summarized under the principle of “fair use.” Every effort has been made to ensure accuracy of the translations. However, we are not responsible for the veracity of their contents. The activities of individuals described herein should not be construed as “typical” behavior of Japanese people nor reflect the intention to portray the country in a negative manner. Our sole aim is to provide examples of various types of reading matter enjoyed by Japanese.